Learning Region and Performance of Pharmaceutical Industry: Evidence from Two Indian States

DOI
10.15415/jtmge.2015.62007

AUTHORS

Tareef Husain 

ABSTRACT

In the extent literature, availability of critical regional and technology-based factors have been recognized as the constituents of learning region which in turn lead to the rising performance of enterprises located in the region. These regional factors subsume sub-national policies, vertical industries, knowledge institution, skill, demand and infrastructural factors. Pharmaceutical industry is one of the knowledge-intensive industries, which is theoretically believed to be performed better in a learning region. The present study takes into account two Indian states namely, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh and describes the status of pharmaceutical industry in the light of learning region. The descriptive explanation based on time series data for the last two decades revealed that the rising trends of pharmaceutical industry in the state of Himachal Pradesh, sourced by the conducive policy supports, rising share of chemical industry, rising enrolements in higher education and availability of good infrastructure. On the other hand, despite encompassing considerable infrastructure, skilled labour, knowledge and demand, Gujarat has reported constant or marginally declining trends of pharmaceutical industry, in terms of number of units, output and employment during last decade

KEYWORDS

Learning region, Performance, Pharmaceutical industry, Indian states, Technological factors, Regional factors. 

REFERENCES

  • Amiti, M. (1998) ‘New trade theories and industrial location in the EU: A survey of evidence’ Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14:2, pp. 45–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/14.2.45.
  • Asiedu, E., and Donald, L. (2004) ‘Capital controls and foreign direct investment’, World Development, 32:3, pp. 479–490.
  • Asheim, B. T., and Isaksen, A. (2002) ‘Regional innovation systems: The integration of local “sticky” and global “ubiquitous” knowledge’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 27:1, pp. 77-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1013100704794.
  • Asiedu, E. and Donald, L. (2004) ‘Capital controls and foreign direct investment’, World Development, 32:3, pp. 479–490.
  • Bernard, A., Eaton, J., Jensen, J. B., and Kortum, S. (2003) ‘Plants and productivity in international trade’, American Economic Review, 93:4, pp. 1268–1290.
  • Chaudhuri, S. (2002) ‘Economic reforms and industrial structure in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, 37:2, pp. 155-162.
  • Cooke, P. (2001) ‘From technopoles to regional innovation systems: The evolution of localized technology development policy’, Canadian Journal of Regional Science, 24:1, pp. 21-40.
  • Cooke, P. (2004) ‘Evolution of regional innovation systems – Emergence, theory, challenge for action’, in Cooke P. (ed.), Regional Innovation Systems, (2nd, pp.1-18), London: Routledge.
  • Cooke, P., Boekholt, P., and Todtling, F. (2000) ‘The governance of innovation in Europe’, London: Pinter.
  • Cooke, P., Uranga, G. M., and Etxebarria, G. (1997) ‘Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organizational dimensions’, Research Policy, 26:4-5, pp. 475-491.
  • Desmet, K., and Parente, S. L. (2010) ‘Bigger is better: Market size, demand elasticity, and innovation’, International Economic Review, 51:2, pp. 319–333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2010.00581.x.
  • Faggian, A. and McCann P. (2009) ‘Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British regions’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33:2, pp. 317–333. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/cje/ben042.
  • Florida, R. (1995) ‘Toward the learning region’, Futures, 27:5, pp. 527-536.
  • Freeman C., Clark J. and Soete L. (1982) ‘Unemployment and technical innovation’, London: Pinter.
  • Freeman, C. (1987) ‘Technology policy and economic performance’, London: Pinter.
  • Gashi, P., I. Hashi, and G. Pugh (2014) ‘Export behaviour of SMEs in transition countries’ Small Business Economics, 42:2, pp. 407-435.
  • Government of Gujarat (2003) ‘BT Policy’, Department of Industries and mines.
  • Government of Gujarat (2003) ‘Industrial Policy’, Department of Industries and Mines.
  • Government of Gujarat (2007) ‘BT Policy’, Department of Industries and Mines.
  • Government of Gujarat (2009) ‘Industrial Policy’, Department of Industries and Mines.
  • Government of Himachal Pradesh (1999) ‘Industrial Policy’, Department of Industries.
  • Government of Himachal Pradesh (2004) ‘Industrial Policy’, Department of Industries.
  • Government of India (2013) ‘New industrial policy and other concessions for the state of Uttaranchal and the state of Himachal Pradesh’, No.1 (10)/2001-NER, New Delhi: Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion.
  • Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1994) ‘Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8:1, pp. 23–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.1.23.
  • Iammarino, S., and McCann, P. (2006) ‘The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: Transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers’, Research Policy, 35:7, pp. 1018-1036.
  • Jha, R. (2007) ‘Options for Indian pharmaceutical industry in the changing environment’, Economic and Political Weekly, 42:39, pp.3958-3967.
  • Joseph, K.J., and Abraham, V. (2009) ‘University–industry interactions and innovation in India: Patterns, determinants, and effects in select industries’, Seoul Journal of Economics, 22:4, pp. 467–498.
  • Krugman, P. (1991) ‘Increasing returns and economic geography’, Journal of Political Economy, 99:3, pp. 483–499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261763.
  • Lalitha, N. (2002) ‘Indian pharmaceutical industry in WTO regime: A SWOT analysis’, Economic and Political Weekly, 37:34, pp. 3342-3555.
  • Lundvall, B. (1992) ‘National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning’ London: Pinter.
  • Maillat, D. (1998) ‘From the industrial district to the innovative milieu: Contribution to an analysis territorialized production organizations’, Discussion Paper: Université de Neutchatel.
  • Malmberg, A. and Maskell, P. (2002) ‘The elusive concept of localization economies: Towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering’, Environment and Planning, 34:3, pp. 429-449. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1068/a3457.
  • Mariussen, A. (2001) ‘Cluster policies – Cluster development?’, Stockholm: Nordregio Report, No. 01/2.
  • Maskell, P. (2001) ‘Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10:4, pp. 921-944. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.921.
  • Melitz (2003) ‘The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity’, Econometrica, 71:6, pp. 1695–1725. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467.
  • Morgan, K. (1997) ‘The learning regions: Institutions, innovation and regional renewal’, Regional Studies, 31:5, pp. 491-503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343409750132289.
  • Neogi, C, Kamiike, A, and Sato, T. (2014) ‘Factors behind the performance of pharmaceutical industries in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, 49:52, pp. 81-89 OECD (2000) ‘Small and medium-sized enterprises: Local strength, global reach’, Paris. Porter, M. E. (1990) ‘The competitive advantage of nations’, London: Basingstoke Macmillan.
  • Porter, M. E. (1998) ‘Clusters and the new economics of competition’, Harvard Business Review, 76:6, pp. 77-90.
  • Porter, M. E. (2000) ‘Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy’, Economic Development Quarterly, 14:1, pp. 15-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089124240001400105.
  • Pradhan, J. P. (2011) ‘Regional heterogeneity and firms’ RandD in India’, Innovation and Development, 1:2, pp. 259-282.
  • Pradhan, J. P. (2013) ‘The geography of patenting In India: Patterns and determinants’, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, No. 50595.
  • Rutten,   R.P., and Boekema, F.W.M. (eds.) (2007) ‘The Learning Region: Foundations, State of the Art, Future, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
  • Sexenian, A. L. (1996) ‘Inside-out: Regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128’, Journal of Policy Development and Research, 2:2, pp. 41-60.
  • Singhi, M.C. (2012) ‘Report on the role of incentives in the development of industrially backward States/UTs’, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Office of the Economic Advisor, Paper No. 39.
  • Subrahmanya, M.H.B. (1995) ‘Reservation policy for small-scale industry: Has it delivered the goods’, Economic and Political Weekly, 3:21, pp. 51-54.
  • Venkatesan R., and Varma S. (2000), ‘Study on policy competition among states in India for attracting direct investment’, National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi.
  • Wheeler, D., and Ashoka M. (1992) ‘International investment location decisions: The Case of U.S. Firms’, Journal of International Economics, 33:1-2, pp. 57-76.
  • Wolfe, D. (2003) ‘Clusters old and new: The transition to a knowledge economy in Canada’s regions’, Kingston: Queen’s School of Policy Studies.

RNI Registration No. CHAENG/2016/68678